We carried out this inspection on the 25 January 2018 and was unannounced. This was the first inspection of this location since a change of provider in December 2016.

Tullyboy is a residential care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. At the time of our inspection five people were living at the home. Tullyboy is arranged over two floors, with bedrooms upstairs and downstairs, a communal lounge/dining room, shared bathrooms and an accessible kitchen. There is a large enclosed garden. The service has a minibus to support people to access the local community.

A registered manager was employed by the service who was present during our inspection. The registered manager responsibilities were currently being overseen by the area care manager. The service had employed a home manager who would be applying to become the registered manager. The home manager was responsible for overseeing the day to day running of the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were happy and relaxed in the home. During our visit we observed people approaching staff for support. Staff spoke with people in a caring and considerate manner responding to requests for support without hesitation.

Staff knew the people they supported and provided person centred care and support. People’s care needs had been assessed prior to them coming to live at the service. Care plans were in place and contained detailed information on how people wished to receive their care and considered their emotional, health and social care needs.

People had a range of activities they could be involved in. People were able to choose what activities they took part in. People were supported to maintain relationships with people that mattered to them.

Processes were in place to safeguard people from potential harm or abuse. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to report any concerns and were confident that action would be taken to address these. Risk assessments and guidance were in place and included information about action to be taken to minimise the risk of harm occurring.

People had access to a range of foods and drinks, with their preferences being noted in their care plans. Where required specialist diets were available, such as pureed foods. People had access to food and drink throughout our inspection.

Medicines were stored securely and administered to ensure people received them safely. People’s wellbeing was monitored and staff had access to healthcare services to ensure people received appropriate healthcare support.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. We observed people being supported to make daily living choices during our visit.

Sufficient numbers of staff were available to meet people’s needs. Staffing levels and skills mix were planned and reviewed to ensure people received the required support. Staff said they received training appropriate to their role and the opportunity to keep training up to date was available each year.

The service worked in partnership with other agencies to ensure people received appropriate support and consistent care. Information was only shared on a need to know basis with other agencies to maintain confidentiality.

There were systems in place, which ensured the quality and safety of the service was reviewed and monitored to identify wh